Live data from Hacker News

Conservatives flock to Parler, claiming censorship on Facebook and Twitter

text.npr.org

731–740 of 889 posts

Re: Conservatives flock to Parler, claiming censorship on Facebook and Twitter

#731

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. That’s not what Twitter does. That’s something some clients do , unfortunately including the official Twitter clients. I just see tweets from those I follow, in chronological order, with no ads. If I saw ads, “recommended” or “trending” etc., I’d get off that client in a hurry.

Twitter indeed works like that. You’ve used the star menu to set your feed to chronological, which is not the default.

Not only is it not the default, it switches back after an arbitrary amount of time (they do say they'll do that when you switch, but they aren't specific on how long and don't alert you when it's gone back)

Re: Conservatives flock to Parler, claiming censorship on Facebook and Twitter

#732

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When Donald Trump launched his campaign he said; “ When Mexico sends its people, they're not sending their best. They're not sending you. They're not sending you. They're sending people that have lots of problems, and they're bringing those problems with us. They're bringing drugs. They're bringing crime. They're rapists. And some, I assume, are good people.” How else is one to take this? He said some are good people…

He was specifically talking about Mexicans crossing the border illegally. Are you saying majority of people who cross the border illegally are good people? Most "good people" don't have to cross the border illegally. They can get a U.S. visa and never leave. The people who will definitely not get a U.S. visa to do that is those have a criminal record in their own country, so their only option is to cross the border i…

Yes, I’m saying the vast majority are good people and regardless of how they cross the border demonizing people with lies or exaggerations is unacceptable.

Re: Conservatives flock to Parler, claiming censorship on Facebook and Twitter

#733
post #441

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're thinking in an us-vs-them mentality. Really, we should be working towards a community where people can respect differing opinions, and not just a bunch of isolated sites full of extremists on either side.

> Really, we should be working towards a community where people can respect differing opinions I agree, but there is a difference between an opinion and disinformation. FFS, masks have been made political, and only one group is doing that. Before that it was AGW, before that it was evolution. I don't know about you, but I've recognized a pattern and quite frankly have zero interest in "respecting" it.

> "FFS, masks have been made political, and only one group is doing that."

no, masks are also politicized by pro-democrat media in an effort to tribalize and maintain attention. npr (and nyt) reports on mask usage in nearly every story regardless of relevance, often in a hysterical tone. it's unseemly, but apparently works or they'd have stopped doing it long ago.

judging by the tone, it may be time to back off from partisan media a bit and chat with real humans more (who tend not to be nearly so extreme).

Re: Conservatives flock to Parler, claiming censorship on Facebook and Twitter

#735
post #601

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nobody is “disputing democracy” at this point. Bush vs Gore took an entire month to sort out. Hillary said this might drag out for a while... and she was right, it is. That’s fine. We have a process for this; no need to be melodramatic. Biden has almost assuredly won, but first there will be some court cases and recounts simply because it was extremely close. That’s a good thing for Democracy.

> Bush vs Gore took an entire month to sort out. That was a difference of around 500 votes out of nearly 6 million, which was around 0.009%. That's well within the range you can get with just the ordinary counting error. It is not at all uncommon for a recount to reverse a lead that small. In addition, Florida at the time was using a lousy ballot marking system that caused many ballots to fail to register that the vo…

There is a lot more to it than that. There had already been a machine recount in Florida, and Bush won that one as well. What Gore did was use a loophole in Florida law to pursue a dubious recount strategy. He demanded hand recounts only in four counties he had won by large margins. That tilted the recount in his favor: hand recounts will find more discernible votes than machine counting, and by only requesting recounts in counties that where the base rate of Gore votes was very high, most of those newly-counted votes would be for Gore. Even WaPo called out this strategy as obviously unfair: https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/opinions/2000/11/18/o...

> But there's a danger to Mr. Gore's eventual legitimacy too, if this extraordinary story eventually results in his election. The recounts will now go forward in three counties--Broward, Palm Beach and Miami-Dade. That at least was the situation as of last night. All three of those jurisdictions are heavily Democratic and voted heavily for Mr. Gore; the recount is thus tilted in his favor.

Gore’s tactics got very ugly including objecting to counting military ballots: https://www.hoover.org/sites/default/files/uploads/documents...

> The Gore campaign, however, viewed the absentee mili- tary ballots received between Election Day and November 17 as a lethal threat. Bob Dole, the 1996 Republican candi- date, who had lost Florida, nonetheless had received a hefty majority of the military absentee vote. Bush would likely top 60 percent at a time when he already enjoyed a 300-vote margin, which Gore was seeking to erase with selective recounts.

Re: Conservatives flock to Parler, claiming censorship on Facebook and Twitter

#736

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Trump was referring to the Drug, Weapons, & Human trafficking that was occurring due to the border policy at the time. This illicit trafficking and violence against civilians & journalists is well documented in many sources.

That doesn't accurately describe Trump's comments. This wasn't some onetime only type of comment. Remember when he said a US judge couldn't rule on a case where Trump was losing, because the judge was of hispanic origin. That's another racist comment. Trump has continually made these types of comments, made references to shithole countries. You can't just dismiss that with a claim that he was saying something else, b…

Exactly. Trump apologists like to pretend like there isn’t a pattern of these statements and treat each of them as a one off and they often add context that doesn’t quite fit.

Re: Conservatives flock to Parler, claiming censorship on Facebook and Twitter

#737
post #705

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Very funny; not arguing for censorship here, but for the design of social media technology that reinforces humanity and not primitive dopamine hit engagement driven advertising. What people say is not the problem. Anyway, we are already in a balanced system that keeps people in line with society's values while still giving them an impression of freedom. The question is just which direction you go from there.

The problem with your arguments is that they are full of assumptions of things that you say are good for society and humanity, while we don't actually have a scientific understanding of what the humanity is for to even be able to decide what is good or not to get there. Which, of course, makes all the arguments imply a power in someone's hands to decide what is "good" for humanity and society or what they are for as…

First, in no world am I arguing that I personally get to decide what is good or bad. Lord no.

Second, your argument devolves to everyone should be able to decide what to do for themselves or their company without discussion about what is good or bad for society or the environment at large.

So no, I can’t agree with that.

At some point we need to be able to discuss how to make society better. If that’s not allowed, then that’s not a society I want to live in.

Re: Conservatives flock to Parler, claiming censorship on Facebook and Twitter

#738

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sure this is how they perceive themselves and I'm sure they spend at least a few hours to talk about this stuff. But in my experience, the SNR is low. It's hard to find the new MKULTRA hidden in the pizzagate, qanon, and birtherism. And ultimately, that's it. But be my guest: go be informed about subtle government interference by the guys who are convinced that Democrats are injecting old people with SARS-CoV-2 s…

I didn't know that strawmanning is the way to the truth /sarcasm. I put conspircy theorists in quotes because the news organisations label people as such when they look away from an official narrative. This is known as dissent. If you are an American your country is founded on dissent. That why I gave you the the Rothbard quote (not a conspiracy theorist btw but an Anarcho Capitalist) because it specifically talks ab…

I'm not interested in who large media say are dissenters or conspiracy theorists because I can make that judgment myself: it being trivial on first listen.

Like I don't actually need someone to tell me Qanon dudes are crazy. I just have to listen to the Qanon dudes themselves. Of course they are convinced they are dissenters exposing the corruption in Big Pizza. Heroes, I'm sure.

That's the funny part. You keep bringing up this Big Media Telling You Who Is Real thing like Big Brother is in charge when I kinda don't really need Big Brother. When this guy comes walking up to me saying that Joe Biden has a secret sex dungeon where he keeps children he abuses that he farms using mutant tadpoles, I kinda really don't need CNN to tell me anything about this guy.

Re: Conservatives flock to Parler, claiming censorship on Facebook and Twitter

#739

I'm getting a lot of value out of Mastodon. I found a medium sized instance who's moderator I trust, and whose culture matches matches what I want out of a social media website. Not having posts algorithmically shoved into your face helps a lot, because it is clear where posts on you home timeline are coming from and thus easier to customise your experience by blocking people. The main problem with mastodon is that i…

Your diverse group isn't very diverse.

They're more diverse than my IRL friends. It feels pretty diverse to me, I follow multiple types of communist and anarchists, some climate and privacy advocates, general progressives and even some more centrist EU people and a ton of people whose politics I know nothing about.

When I follow people I mostly just check if they don't have any posts that are homophobic, transphobic or racist, because that is shit I do not want on my timeline. For the rest I don't really care, I just follow the people whose posts I enjoy reading.

Re: Conservatives flock to Parler, claiming censorship on Facebook and Twitter

#740
Parler actually exposes its users to a nasty legal risk that Twitter & Facebook do not:

> 14. You agree to defend and indemnify Parler, as well as any of its officers, directors, employees, and agents, from and against any and all claims, actions, damages, obligations, losses, liabilities, costs or debt, and expenses (including but not limited to all attorneys fees)

TL;DR: if Parler gets sued over a post of yours, you get to foot all their legal bills. Not an ideal setup for a “free speech” platform.

Post reply on HN